controller

Ummm, going to go watch 300 several times and try to unsee what has been seen.

Ummm...What?

Is it possible the truck in the camo is the F-100 and the atlas concept is what to come if the F-150 and super duty line are combined? There was some talk on BON not too long ago that Ford may combine the light duty and heavy duty trucks using the same interior parts and sheet metal and some power trains if combined back up. Was it '98 when the light duty and heavy duty split and became the separate F-150, F-250, etc? I'm probably wrong but the only thing that would separate the light duty from heavy duty would be the frame, right? The F-150 uses a boxed frame while the super duty uses c-channel. Anyway, I like the concept. There's only so much you can do with trucks as far as styling goes. It'll come down to capability and FE that separates the leader (Ford) from the rest of the pack. The Chevy's, while capable, offer nothing new and the styling is just ugly. Would love to have a crew cab F-100 with a 3.7 or 2.7 EB, manual tranny 2-tone dark blue/dark grey.

"...keeps reminding you that it needs to go on a diet". I'm smellin' a big pile of bovine fecal matter.

I love the rear, think it looks great...but then, I've always been an a$$-man.

Really? Got mine today. And yeah, stop posting excerpts. Can't wait to read this one.

Thanks for the pics, love the look of the fusion. Did Nissan or Toyota have anything on Frontier or Tacoma?

Hey, chicken little, ease up. We had some pretty good clues this was coming because of the user-friendliness and other issues of MFT. Stop being a fair-weather fan and have faith that Ford will fix the problems.

It's been a while since I've posted and I'll try to keep my post short and keep my ignorance to a minimum. The Ranger topic just keeps me thinking, is the Super Duty line still needed? I know the F-150 uses a boxed frame, F250+ uses C-channel frame, I think. The C channel is important for different configurations a contractor might need, right? The F-150 has grown in size and is, as I've read on BON, has the same capabilities the F-250s had not too long ago. Is it possible to have two different frames but use all the sheet metal, interior components, etc the F-150 uses and use the same dimensions of the current F-150 and just, depending on the frame label it F-150, 250, 350? The reason I ask is if it were possible to combine the the best of both into one truck, then I could see Ford building a replacement for the Ranger, call it F-100 and still have those numbers needed to keep the sales crown and reputation for building great trucks. Would that open up room to have a smaller truck without stealing sales? I haven't compared dimensions yet, but it looks like the F-150 SCrew is bigger/longer than a 250 SCrew. Just some thoughts on the issue. Personally, would love to see a replacement Ranger/F-100. I still miss my '88 Ranger, thing ran like a champ, but the "new" '97 F-150s just looked too good. Anyway, hope my post makes sense. Please be kind if my thinking is way off. Thanks.

Very true. Just wish Congress/White House had more people with real-world experience whether it be manufacturing, health care, etc. I still would love to see Alan on a Republican ticket. Wishful thinking I guess:(

Wouldn't mind seeing Alan on the ticket as a vice president candidate. If he could fix Ford and Boeing, I think he could do wonders for the country. Anyone else think the same?

Well, they could always do what Toyota does with the 4Runner, have the rear glass retract up and down.

Thought I read somewhere Ford's weight reduction programs are supposed to start with the '11 F-150???

Does anybody think putting manual lumbar support in the rear seats of the 2011 F-150 would be a bad idea? Idea just popped into my head while reading the posts, too much beer maybe?

Too bad you can't get the 3.7L on the limited models.